Saturday, June 13, 2015

Exchange with an unrepentant linker.

Referring to this statement of policy, "Anonymous said...
Respectfully disagree, Dutchman6!
To paraphrase Plucky Duck, "No! Stop! Not my turn to write the blog! Your turn to write the blog! Not my turn to screen the comments! Your turn to screen the comments!"
If I see an article that I think you need to see, I'm gonna post the link in a comment. Period. Because it's the quickest most convenient way for me to get it to your eyes and potentially the eyes of the other SSI readers at my disposal. If you want to dump it, that's your decision. Your blog, your rules. If screening comments is becoming too much of a time eater, and I can see where it could, bring in a screener.
To which I replied:
Then they will keep getting deleted. Period. If you want to get me to look at something, send it in an email. There is no difference to you in time, there is plenty difference to me. And advice to "get a screener" is worse than useless. You think that hasn't occurred to me? But with that position comes keys to the kingdom -- passwords, access, trust that their judgment is as informed as mine and reflects my own intentions. People who meet that standard can be counted on one hand and they are all busy as hell themselves. It's like people who tell me, "you should do this," or, "you should do that," without volunteering to make it happen or contributing anything to their bright idea. I may wish in one hand and shit in the other but my Grandpa Vanderboegh long ago told me which fills up first. Again, if you want to send a link, send it email where I can at least see who it's coming from. Otherwise, it's deleted. Period. And all you're doing otherwise is adding to my workload. Thanks for all the help.


Bear said...

What part of "It's Mike's blog, not mine" don't these people get?

If he thinks his stuff is oh-oh-important-and time-critical, let him start his own blog, build up dedicated readership, research topics, write complete columns, and manage commenters himself.

Shoot,he could even research/write those columns and then submit them to you for possible use on your blog. (Personally, I think that might be OK occasionally, but generally I come here for your posts. I'd rather not see SSI turn into a pseudo-emagazine with a stable of different writers.)

Anonymous said...

There's a scene in "Band of Brothers" where the relatively new Maj. Winters is watching an assault on a farmhouse that must not fail begin to come apart. He starts to jump in and save the day when he's reminded by his boss that he can't do it all.

If you are truly in a place where you cannot keep on as you have, and Lord knows there have really been some bumps in your road of late, they you're either going to have to cut back or find someone to whom you can delegate.

If you cannot find someone who can assume some of the weight then we all screwed. Because you and David are two of the key people on the good side of this struggle. If you fall, and as a mortal you most surely will, someone must be in place to pick up your part or really bad things are going to happen. Hopefully that will be sometime way down the road. But it will happen. And you will hasten the day if you burn yourself out. If I can help by moving traffic off the blog comments and onto email, then that's what I will do.

Aaron Zelman and JPFO are gone. David is still plugging away but his "National Gun Rights Examiner" seems to have been muzzled, at least for the present. We can't lose you and Sipsey Street Irregulars as well.

Mark my words, Dutchman6. Take care of yourself!

Unclezip said...

Right on, Mike. This is a person who is trying to force his worldview onto you, and by extension, onto the rest of us. You have every right to just delete anything coming from that source.

I have a filter on my blog which takes out any links, and optionally turns them into text. Maybe you could have a conversation with your site administrator.

Anonymous said...

I am going to have to agree with the poster. Being the sole proprieter of SSI once upon a time worked out well when the III footprint was relatively small. The days of one man with a placard are long over. Call it a victimization of your own success. It is time to trust a select few. If only a little some of the day to day activites. Emails can be forwarded. Accounts can be monitored. Volunteers can volunteer. The integrity of your sources need never be shared, if that is what you are concerned about. I am sure you could agree that there are certain tasks that monopolize your time and keeps you from convolescence, the next speech, the next bit of information.

Like they teach us in Sergeant school, you can delegate tasks but not responsibility. You will find that with minute tasks like vetting links that you are sent and monitoring social media can be easily done by semi-literate monkeys. Then you will have time for more pressing matters like finishing the damn book and making the III community look good.

Consider it anyway. Even if you are the most obstinate and contrary old man I ever knew of.

Anonymous said...

Here's a tip or two from a Frequent Poster- follow the rules, use a little discretion, and post a name or identifying mark of some kind. I am reasonably certain that Mr, Vanderboegh does not agree with all of my posts, but not being a jerk is often a helpful strategy.

Robin said...

Sir, Why did you respond? You don't have to reply to a comment. It's your blog so just keep doing what you are doing. I can see the frustration on both sides and you are both right. To forestall any acrimony and stress, just block him. You need to lessen your stress level as much as you can, if only for your own health.
I also don't want to see you start attacking those who are on your side but just disagree on a few points. Please don't alienate your readers the way Mr. Codrea did with me at The War on Guns. I was on his side until he insulted me; now I don't read him.
Very sincerely and respectfully, Robin

Anonymous said...

Here's my 2 cents as someone who sends out articles via e-mail to a list of recipients daily in an effort to wake them up; but I don't do it here. Why? Because the people that come here are pretty damn awake to begin with and I'm certain are already visiting many of the same websites I'm sending my info from. To put something of that nature in my comment would be redundant. If enlightening folks is someones aim then there are many other platforms to do it with, such as Facebook, Twitter, e-mails (my method) or print flyers and hand them out if you have to. But if someone has a blog-site and has certain rules they'd like people to adhere to then respect their wishes. Why is that so hard? If someone thinks they know more than the blog author or is somehow more enlightened in some respect, then a private conversation via e-mail is in order. And if said blog author tells you to fuck off then that is their right to do because it's their blog! Evangelizing to others to convert them to your way of thinking when they are set against it for whatever reasons is not only a waste of your breath but it's damn rude...Another way to look at it is: this site is Mike's property. Does anyone want people trespassing and just marching along on their property? I know i don't. If you don't respect someones property then you don't respect them as an individual. And remember, property (and who owns it) is one of the major differences between individualism and collectivism..

Chiu ChunLing said...

Just want to point out that there is a place for respectful disagreement, and there are disagreements which can remain respectful.

But it is not fundamentally possible to "respectfully disagree" that a request should be respected. Right or wrong, when you say that you will not honor a request, your disagreement is not respectful. And if you respect the request, you are not, in point of fact, disagreeing.

So far as SSI goes, I accept it as being Mike Vanderboegh's personal brand, and while I hope that it may leave an enduring legacy regardless of the health/travel/access challenges Mike himself suffers, that is better accomplished by spreading links to SSI, rather than increasing the number which lead away. Which is not where I was heading at the beginning of the sentence, but probably something I was going to say anyway. No, what I was going to say is that being able to come here and get MV's thoughts, and not anyone else's, is a pretty strong aspect of the site as it is, and naturally tends to be an element that appeals to the audience that is. I don't actively avoid sites which have a multitude of voices, though I usually prefer that they be bound together by a discernible theme of some kind. But I do sometimes like a site that is clearly stamped with the impression of a strong, singular, perhaps even inimitable personality. And I'm guessing that most people who follow SSI like it for what it is.